MP and Councillor Tony Ball confirm Basildon Council’s position
Today in Parliament John Baron MP hosted a meeting which involved the travellers at the illegal Dale Farm site, local Councillors and residents. The purpose was to follow up on the meeting in January and agree action points going forward.
The travellers, following consultation at Dale Farm stated that they would not leave peacefully unless they had somewhere to go. The Council confirmed its position that it will clear the site. However, a £60 million fund has been made available in the last month from central Government which the travellers are now pursuing with the aim of finding sites outside the Borough.
John and Councillor Tony Ball said:
“We have made it clear that the rule of law must be obeyed and that this site will be cleared forcefully if necessary and within our timetable. However, we see it as our civic duty to go the extra mile to try and avoid the misery of a forced eviction whilst upholding the law.”
“There is a £60 million fund which has only become available in the last month to help provide sites. The travellers are now liaising with Essex County Council and the HCA in order to use this fund to locate sites outside the District. We will facilitate communication if required.”
Further to this, a Planning Application has been received for a Traveller site on the HCA land at Gardiners Lane South. However, that application is defective in that much necessary work has simply not been done. No such application can be considered until it reaches the high standard that we require for all major applications in Basildon Borough.
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
Tuesday, March 01, 2011
Basildon Borough Budget
It was Budget night last night at Basildon Council. My colleague Cllr. Phil Turner presented a balanced programme that cuts the Council Tax by 0.25%, maintains frontline services and invests in community facilities, while making the required savings to keep in line with the fall in government support. So, we are spening £300,000 this year on Hannakins Farm Community Centre, Pitsea Leisure Centre and Victoria Park. Who could possibly object? Well, step forward Basildon Labour Party.
Labour's plan was to take £2m from reserves and borrow £2m in order to avoid building on open space to fund the Sporting Village. This was in support of the Kent View Road campaign to prevent houses being built in their vicinity. So, we have the basic principle of spending very large amounts of money in order to satisfy a relatively small resident's group. The Council's reserves and debt levels would be compromised so that Labour can jump on a bandwagon. Except that doesn't happen because they know that those sensible Tories will vote it down.
Of course, their proposal was technically flawed. They got the sum required to meet their stated objectives wrong; it's £8m not £4m. The failed to take the loss of income to the Council from the reserves they spent, which are currently invested. Worst of all, they programmed in a further £150,000 of savings without realising that this almost certainly equated to redundancies. Oh did their little faces fall when that was explained to them. What a shambles.
Their next wheeze was to cancel our weekend free car-parking in order to fund a free music festival that we have cut. They claimed that this £100,000 initiative had failed. Well, not according to the local Chambers of Commerce and the Essex FSB it hasn't, but Labour didn't bother to talk to them. Another shambles.
Sometimes I wish for a better opposition. Sometimes.
Labour's plan was to take £2m from reserves and borrow £2m in order to avoid building on open space to fund the Sporting Village. This was in support of the Kent View Road campaign to prevent houses being built in their vicinity. So, we have the basic principle of spending very large amounts of money in order to satisfy a relatively small resident's group. The Council's reserves and debt levels would be compromised so that Labour can jump on a bandwagon. Except that doesn't happen because they know that those sensible Tories will vote it down.
Of course, their proposal was technically flawed. They got the sum required to meet their stated objectives wrong; it's £8m not £4m. The failed to take the loss of income to the Council from the reserves they spent, which are currently invested. Worst of all, they programmed in a further £150,000 of savings without realising that this almost certainly equated to redundancies. Oh did their little faces fall when that was explained to them. What a shambles.
Their next wheeze was to cancel our weekend free car-parking in order to fund a free music festival that we have cut. They claimed that this £100,000 initiative had failed. Well, not according to the local Chambers of Commerce and the Essex FSB it hasn't, but Labour didn't bother to talk to them. Another shambles.
Sometimes I wish for a better opposition. Sometimes.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Megrahi blackmailed Gaddafi over Lockerbie bombing
Just when you think the Labour government's actions over the Lockerbie terrorist Megrahi couldn't get any more sordid, another shoe drops. Now they are free to tell the truth it appears Megrahi threatened to reveal the details of how Gaddafi ordered the Lockerbie bombing unless the dictator got him out of his Scottish prison. According to the Telegraph, this is from two separate sources: former Justice Minister Mustapha Abdel-Jalil and former terror mastermind Atef Abu Bakr. So, basically we have confirmation that Megrahi was as guilty as hell, that Gaddafi planned the whole thing and yet the bomber is sitting at home with this family having exceeded his advertised 3-month lifespan by a long enough time to write a novel. Moreover, we now know why Libya was so desperate to get him home: because he had said he would squeal otherwise, and Gordon Brown and his cronies went along with it.
Hang on, someone might say, wasn't this all the decision of the Scottish government? Well, for the someone who doesn't know how politics works, there would have been no way on God's green earth that the Scots would have let Megrahi go over the strong and public objections of the British government. Instead, the Brown regime gave the Scots political cover by keeping any criticism either muted or non-existent. That created an environment where the Scottish government could release Megrahi without political consequences in Scotland and where US criticism largely fell on the UK. The fact is that Gordon Brown let the worst mass-murderer in British history out of jail because he thought it would improve relations with a genocidal dictator.
That man's moral compass is nailed to a direction that does not require principles to follow.
Hang on, someone might say, wasn't this all the decision of the Scottish government? Well, for the someone who doesn't know how politics works, there would have been no way on God's green earth that the Scots would have let Megrahi go over the strong and public objections of the British government. Instead, the Brown regime gave the Scots political cover by keeping any criticism either muted or non-existent. That created an environment where the Scottish government could release Megrahi without political consequences in Scotland and where US criticism largely fell on the UK. The fact is that Gordon Brown let the worst mass-murderer in British history out of jail because he thought it would improve relations with a genocidal dictator.
That man's moral compass is nailed to a direction that does not require principles to follow.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Brown explains his Ethical Foreign Policy to Gaddafi
I know that you have to deal with unsavoury characters as PM, but Labour had a policy of positively cosying up to Gaddafi. Given current events Brown is probably hoping that photographic evidence of contacts with the genocidal dictator won't emerge.
Oh dear:
Oh dear:
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Why Libya and not Burma?
Why Egypt, Tunisia and Libya and not Burma or North Korea? There is one factor that marks out the last two that is not present in the first three; the status and role of the army. In Burma and North Korea the army is integral to the State. Burma is run by the army. The leaders of North Korea hold rank in the army and the senior generals sit on the highest committees in the land. For the Arab countries the army is separate from the ruling party, and is a distinct and separate institution. In Egypt and Tunisia the armies are relatively powerful and designed to fulfil their role of protecting the country. In Libya, the army is relatively weak and not trusted by the ruling elite. This explains the Chadian mercenary units, the hiring of mercenaries being a classic tactic of rulers who doubt the loyalty of their own forces.
What this all means is the answer to this simple question: will the army fire on its own people? In the case of Burma and North Korea, no-one really doubts the answer. Both states have histories of using their armies for brutal internal repression. In the Arab countries the answer is no, and that is the basic reason why Hosni Mubarak and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali are now in need of alternative employment. In Libya the answer also appears to be no, but Gaddafi's use of mercenaries has changed the dynamic. If you meet a peaceful demonstration with live heavy weapons fire from a bunch of foreigners then you had better think things through. Predictably, the Libyan army wasn't going to sit still while hired Chadians murdered their brothers and sisters. There is now a state of civil war in the country.
Of the many options open to him when the protests began it is actually possible that Gaddafi chose the worst, for both his country and for himself. By going with the Ceaușescu strategy there is a real chance that this will end with him and his family being put up against a wall and shot.
I suspect that there won't be too many tears if that happens.
What this all means is the answer to this simple question: will the army fire on its own people? In the case of Burma and North Korea, no-one really doubts the answer. Both states have histories of using their armies for brutal internal repression. In the Arab countries the answer is no, and that is the basic reason why Hosni Mubarak and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali are now in need of alternative employment. In Libya the answer also appears to be no, but Gaddafi's use of mercenaries has changed the dynamic. If you meet a peaceful demonstration with live heavy weapons fire from a bunch of foreigners then you had better think things through. Predictably, the Libyan army wasn't going to sit still while hired Chadians murdered their brothers and sisters. There is now a state of civil war in the country.
Of the many options open to him when the protests began it is actually possible that Gaddafi chose the worst, for both his country and for himself. By going with the Ceaușescu strategy there is a real chance that this will end with him and his family being put up against a wall and shot.
I suspect that there won't be too many tears if that happens.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
West Ham clobbers Alastair Campbell
I am a West Ham fan. I am also a football fan, in that I will watch any decent team because I just like to see the game played well. Last night I didn't have to stray from my favourite team though because the boys in claret and blue were playing Burnley in the FA Cup. As anyone who follows that competition knows, West Ham won 5-1. What was even more satisfying was that the TV cameras picked out lifelong Burnley fan Alastair Campbell in the crowd looking a little sad.
Campbell is the former Director of Communications and Strategy to Tony Blair. He was also the man who debased British politics with a culture of lies, including the web of deception that fooled the Commons into voting for the Iraq war. His poison extended to the last election, where he tried to spin the line that Labour hadn't actually lost in an effort to keep Gordon Brown in power.
God knows what he is doing now, maybe lying to himself in the mirror of a morning just to keep in practice.
Campbell is the former Director of Communications and Strategy to Tony Blair. He was also the man who debased British politics with a culture of lies, including the web of deception that fooled the Commons into voting for the Iraq war. His poison extended to the last election, where he tried to spin the line that Labour hadn't actually lost in an effort to keep Gordon Brown in power.
God knows what he is doing now, maybe lying to himself in the mirror of a morning just to keep in practice.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Labour Control Freakery kills their own media operation
Have you been wondering why so few Labour talking heads appear in the media? Certainly, their absence is very noticeable. We often get government ministers on Sky or the BBC without any response from their supposed shadows, and media items actually originating with a Labour figure, with the exception of Ed Miliband, are non-existent. Well, the Mail has the answer. Apparently, if you are a Labour shadow minister who wants to do any kind of media you have to fill in a form and get it approved by the Leader's office first. No, I am not making this up.
For those of you who haven't dealt with broadcast journalists what you tend to get is a phone call asking you to appear on their radio or TV programme at a particular slot and usually at quite short notice. Picture the scene: call to Labour Shadow Minister at 07:00, "hello can you do a slot at 09:00 to reply to William Hague on the situation in Libya"? Response, "er, OK", frantic search for form, furious scribble, desperate delivery to designated person outside of office hours, doesn't get returned in time and, "Sky Newsroom? Really sorry but I can't make it this morning, something desperately important has come up...". So, William Hague gets a clear run because no-one makes him fill in any kind of a form and the Labour party manages to drop the ball yet again.
The only thing that surprises me is that the Shadow Cabinet did not collectively tell Ed to shove off.
For those of you who haven't dealt with broadcast journalists what you tend to get is a phone call asking you to appear on their radio or TV programme at a particular slot and usually at quite short notice. Picture the scene: call to Labour Shadow Minister at 07:00, "hello can you do a slot at 09:00 to reply to William Hague on the situation in Libya"? Response, "er, OK", frantic search for form, furious scribble, desperate delivery to designated person outside of office hours, doesn't get returned in time and, "Sky Newsroom? Really sorry but I can't make it this morning, something desperately important has come up...". So, William Hague gets a clear run because no-one makes him fill in any kind of a form and the Labour party manages to drop the ball yet again.
The only thing that surprises me is that the Shadow Cabinet did not collectively tell Ed to shove off.
Council Non-jobs, Eric Pickles gets tough
The government's latest issue with Local Authorities is non-jobs. These, of course, are local government jobs that most people add limited value to, well, anything. The best examples of these are from our old friends at Manchester City Council, the same people who seem to enjoy cutting their own services because they get to blame the government about it, with the following:
Eric Pickles does have a point though. Earlier this week I was told that Basildon Borough Council had been criticised because we do not employ a Tourism Officer. Now, I love this area, and I would be first to sing its numerous virtues to an outsider, but a Tourism Officer? I don't think so. Apparently though we are the only Council in Essex without one.
Think on that for a moment.
Nuclear Free Local Authorities Secretariat Policy and Research Officer - salary up to £37,543, job description: Identifying nuclear hazards and pressing for existing binding international agreements on nuclear weapons;and
New Media Manager - salary up to £38,000, job description: Facebook and Twitter Tsar, providing presence on social networking sites and other web tasks.These roles are clearly bonkers, but sometimes Local Government is its own worst enemy. Jobs are advertised with descriptions in Council-speak so that they are incomprehensible to human beings. There is also the depressing tendency to try and reflect every aspect of a job in the job title, which leads to a title that is several sentences of gibberish long.
Eric Pickles does have a point though. Earlier this week I was told that Basildon Borough Council had been criticised because we do not employ a Tourism Officer. Now, I love this area, and I would be first to sing its numerous virtues to an outsider, but a Tourism Officer? I don't think so. Apparently though we are the only Council in Essex without one.
Think on that for a moment.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Forests PMQs - Less Questions and Answers and more a mugging
Wednesday saw Prime Minister's questions in the House of Commons. As a Tory I found it thoroughly entertaining, but I shudder to think what a Labour Party member would have thought. Now Ed Miliband is clearly a bright bloke but his performance on Wednesday was, frankly, appalling. He started by selectively quoting the former Cabinet Office Chief Economist, who was critical of the government on youth unemployment. Oddly enough, he left out the bit when the same man criticised the previous Labour government. The problem with quote mining is that if the other chap has the rest of the quotes then you can be made to look a fool. David Cameron did and so Ed was.
All I can conclude is that his question entirely came from a recent article in The Guardian, which, oddly enough, took a bit of an anti-government line. There was clearly no cross check with other media sources. Someone on Ed's staff needs a motivational talk at the very least.
Things actually got worse when Ed asked if the Prime Minister was happy with the proposed privatisation of England's forests. The answer was 'no'. Now it was obvious that Ed was not expecting this and so his follow up material was useless, but he tried to use it anyway, which was a very bad move. What he should have done is changed tack, thanked the Prime Minister for listening, asked for the timescales for a formal announcement, in fact just about anything other than use his prepared questions. He didn't, and was efficiently kebabbed by David Cameron as a result.
The same person on Ed's staff needs to consider that a question to the Prime Minister might not always yield the expected answer, or not. I am quite enjoying things as they are.
All I can conclude is that his question entirely came from a recent article in The Guardian, which, oddly enough, took a bit of an anti-government line. There was clearly no cross check with other media sources. Someone on Ed's staff needs a motivational talk at the very least.
Things actually got worse when Ed asked if the Prime Minister was happy with the proposed privatisation of England's forests. The answer was 'no'. Now it was obvious that Ed was not expecting this and so his follow up material was useless, but he tried to use it anyway, which was a very bad move. What he should have done is changed tack, thanked the Prime Minister for listening, asked for the timescales for a formal announcement, in fact just about anything other than use his prepared questions. He didn't, and was efficiently kebabbed by David Cameron as a result.
The same person on Ed's staff needs to consider that a question to the Prime Minister might not always yield the expected answer, or not. I am quite enjoying things as they are.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Votes on Council Officer salaries over £100k
Eric Pickles is clearly the energiser bunny of the government. It seems that barely a day goes by without another policy announcement on Local Government, and today is no different. The latest idea is that if a Council is to award a salary of over £100K then there must be a vote at Full Council to authorise it.
It is easy to see the downsides of this, and interview subjects have been mentioning this morning on radio and television. Firstly, it will be pretty intrusive and embarrassing for the new hire or promotion to have their salary debated at a public meeting where dozens of people will be present. Secondly, it is easy to imagine people who don't really understand executive pay getting over-excited by the whole process, and thirdly it will absolutely make senior officer pay the stuff of politics. All true, but the current system of closed-door meetings has led to astonishing salary inflation in the public sector, and debating and voting on senior salaries in public will no doubt have a dampening effect on salary levels in the future. There is also the basic principle that as much Council business should be transacted in public and attached to a democratic process.
Transparency and accountability are good antidotes to bad decisions.
It is easy to see the downsides of this, and interview subjects have been mentioning this morning on radio and television. Firstly, it will be pretty intrusive and embarrassing for the new hire or promotion to have their salary debated at a public meeting where dozens of people will be present. Secondly, it is easy to imagine people who don't really understand executive pay getting over-excited by the whole process, and thirdly it will absolutely make senior officer pay the stuff of politics. All true, but the current system of closed-door meetings has led to astonishing salary inflation in the public sector, and debating and voting on senior salaries in public will no doubt have a dampening effect on salary levels in the future. There is also the basic principle that as much Council business should be transacted in public and attached to a democratic process.
Transparency and accountability are good antidotes to bad decisions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)